Haryana quota Bill challenged in Punjab and Haryana High Courthttps://indianexpress.com/article/cities/chandigarh/haryana-quota-bill-challenged-in-punjab-haryana-high-court/

Haryana quota Bill challenged in Punjab and Haryana High Court

The petition has submitted that the Bill is against the law laid down by the Supreme Court in “Indira Sawhney” case in 1992 that reservation cannot exceed more than 50 pc

haryana high court, haryana HC, panjab university, panjab university senator, PU elections, Panjab university news, chandigarh news

A DAY after its passage in Haryana Assembly, the  (Reservation in Services and Admission in Educational Institutions) Bill, 2016 was challenged in the Punjab and Haryana High Court on Wednesday.

The petition will come up for hearing on April 4.

A Jind resident, advocate Shakti Singh, filed the petition in the High Court registry, submitting that the state
government “under the pressure of a particular caste” and due to fear of agitation passed the Bill within a day.

[related-post]

The petitioner added that 10 per cent reservation each were provided to BC ‘C’ (Jat, Jat Sikh, Ror, Tyagi, Bishnoi and Muslim Jat/Mulla Jat) and EBP categories “without obtaining any survey, committee or commission report”.

Advertising

The petitioner has sought quashing of the Bill wherein reservation in Class III and IV government jobs has been “extended up to 70 per cent”.

He has also alleged that “the Government of Haryana failed to protect the fundamental rights as well as civil rights of the citizens” during the recent Jat agitation.

It has been submitted that the Bill is against the law laid down by the Supreme Court in “Indira Sawhney” case in 1992 that reservation cannot exceed more than 50 per cent and, in certain extraordinary situations, some relaxation in this strict rule may become imperative.

A prayer has been made that during the pendency of the petition, the Bill should be stayed by the court.

The petitioner has pointed out that the Bill is against the Supreme Court judgment in “Ram Singh and another” case of March 17, 2015, in which the apex court had stated that the Jats were not socially, educationally, politically backward and have adequate representation in public employment.

The petition further reads that the Supreme Court had added that such class could not be treated as OBC and reservation should restricted to the most distressed section of people.

The Supreme Court’s observation in “Ram Singh and another” case had come on the basis of the National Commission of Backward Class report that Jats had adequate representation in the Armed Forces, government services and educational institutes, the petitioner has submitted.